What's new

WARNING : (to) U S House of Rep. - - - "Fiscal CLIFF AHEAD" !

In case your wondering who drove us towards the fiscal cliff the fastest !

Facts About the U.S. Debt
  • Today the U.S. Debt = $16.2 trillion
  • When President Obama took office in 2009 the U.S. Debt = $9.986 trillion
  • When President Bush took office in 2001 the U.S. Debt = $5.629 trillion
  • The U.S. owes more money than any other nation in the history of the world
  • The U.S. debt is up 54% under President Obama in just over three years
  • By the end of President Obama’s first term the U.S. debt will have increased by a larger amount than under President Bush’s entire two-term presidency
  • Debt per citizen = $49,300
  • Debt per taxpayer = $136,000
  • Over 60% of all spending is on the “Big Four" - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and National Defense
http://www.noamericandebt.com/national-debt

So Bush ran the tab up $4.3 trillion, in 8 years running 2 wars !
Barrack ran it up , $6.4 trillion, in 4 years, winding down 2 wars !

YO..'Bird-Brain'.
I'm a bit perplexed. I mean, after reading all the info you posted here,.....then why did the REPUGS LOSE the F Election ???????

LEAN FORWARD !
 
Besides the fact, a lot of us believe that you live in a never-ending state of perplexion, apparently, the majority of Americans want handouts and cradle to grave government !

LEAN FORWARD & BEND OVER!
 
When some one says you are clueless, get out the scissors and glue and prove it.

76465_10151572816731110_1424426970_n.jpg
 
YO..'Bird-Brain'.
I'm a bit perplexed. I mean, after reading all the info you posted here,.....then why did the REPUGS LOSE the F Election ???????

LEAN FORWARD !

Don't be a dolt!

Most people don't have the brains that God gave an ant when it comes to economics and politics. Fact is whomever the looks more "Likeable" on TV gets elected. Plain and simple.
 
Don't be a dolt!

Most people don't have the brains that God gave an ant when it comes to economics and politics. Fact is whomever the looks more "Likeable" on TV gets elected. Plain and simple.

Its a marketing scheme anymore.
 
Besides the fact, a lot of us believe that you live in a never-ending state of perplexion, apparently, the majority of Americans want handouts and cradle to grave government !

LEAN FORWARD & BEND OVER!

" never ending state of..P E R P L E X I O N "

W T F....is ....."PERPLEXION" ????????

When did you LEARN That word down there in the Land of HIGHER EDUCATION ??

Did you learn "That Word" the same day you learned..." Y'ALL " ???????????

(What a F'n DOPE) !!!!!!!!!!!
 
" never ending state of..P E R P L E X I O N "

W T F....is ....."PERPLEXION" ????????

When did you LEARN That word down there in the Land of HIGHER EDUCATION ??

Did you learn "That Word" the same day you learned..." Y'ALL " ???????????

(What a F'n DOPE) !!!!!!!!!!!

Can see your still perplexed, who'd of thunk it ?
 
And now for something completely different from various sources,
Lesson From UK: Tax Hike on Wealthy Lowers Revenue
One side wants to rein in entitlements to deal with the budget deficit. The other side insists that any such moves be accompanied by higher taxes on the wealthy.
That may sound like the ongoing fiscal battle in Washington, but actually describes the situation in Britain.
The difference is that Britain has already raised taxes on the wealthy, with a telling result: The government actually lost revenue.
In the 2009-2010 tax year in Britain, more than 16,000 people reported annual income of more than 1 million pounds (equal to about $1.6 million today). Then in 2010, Prime Minister Gordon Brown, a member of the Labour Party, introduced a new 50 percent top income tax rate for high-income earners. After that, the number of people reporting income of at least 1 million pounds fell to 6,000.
“It is believed that rich Britons moved abroad or took steps to avoid paying the new levy by reducing their taxable incomes,” The Telegraph reported.
Harriet Baldwin, a Conservative member of Parliament, said: “Labour’s ideological tax hike led to a tax cull of millionaires.”
Instead of raising revenue, the tax hike cost the U.K. 7 billion pounds ($11.2 billion) in lost revenue — and that in an economy one-quarter the size of America’s.
Now the government of Conservative Party Prime Minister David Cameron has announced that it will lower the top rate from 50 percent to 45 percent, a move the Labour Party officials have called a “tax cut for millionaires.”
In ongoing budget talks, Conservatives want to freeze out-of-work benefits, which are set to rise with inflation, while liberals in the government “will only allow the benefits freeze if taxes on the rich are increased,” according to The Telegraph.
Democrats in the United States might note that since Cameron’s government announced the lower top rate, the number of Britons reporting income of at least 1 million pounds has risen to 10,000.

A cautionary tale as we approach the fabricated cliff
 
He does! It's called class warfare !

"In less than 6 minutes, economist Tim Groseclose explains why raising more taxes does NOT mean government will get more revenue.
In fact, there is a point when the opposite happens — when raising more taxes brings in less and less revenue to government.
Astoundingly, it was none other than Christina Romer, former Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers in the Obama regime, who did a study that found that a marginal (or top) tax rate of 33% is the point when increasing taxes becomes counter-productive. That should make us wonder why Obama and the Left keep insisting on raising taxes on “the rich”….

The obvious answer is:
They’re not doing that for the practical reason of increasing government revenue. They’re doing that for ideological class-warfare reasons."
http://beforeitsnews.com/opinion-conservative/2012/12/at-what-point-does-taxing-more-actually-reduces-govt-revenue-2538722.html

But that's ok, as long as their paying their "Fair Share " !
 
lets-begin-with-a-look-at-the-top-income-tax-bracket-since-the-federal-income-tax-was-started-in-1913-as-you-can-see-relative-to-history-its-currently-very-low.jpg



Take a look at the tax rates during the boom times (especially the '90's) compared to today.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top